NO Downstate should STAY permanently. - [Merged]

[UmbraNoctis.1907]

Kiting and picking players off 1 by 1 in an outnumbered situation certainly requires more skill than outnumbering and not having to worry about anything as long there is someone nearby who is capable of pressing F.

 

Not liking downstate is not a matter of "not knowing how to deal with it" and more a matter of "no way to deal with it in many outnumbered situations" because it is (in combination with ressing) simply too strong while at the same time braindead easy to utilize as long the numbers advantage is there.

 

Let's be real, if someone is a good player on a somewhat decent build - he won't go down often enough when outnumbering an enemy for downstate to be relevant. Numerical superiority provides such a huge advantage on its own, even without downstate, that blaming op builds or whatever else for going down when outnumbering is not valid. Downstate also does not add depth to combat or make it more skillful, as fighting "alive" players is a lot more multifaceted and skillful, considering the amount of plays and counterplay that is possible, than having to deal with an (mostly) immobile meatshield that can recieve insane healing from someone who just needs to press one button without cd, while still dealing dmg by - you can guess it - pressing one button. It is a carry for players who need to rely on numbers, and that's fully intended. I'm not asking for it to be removed as that would be futile. Still, i'd like to see it nerfed, just like everything else has been nerfed, to make it a little bit more balanced (it is not like it has been too weak in the past).

[DaVid Darksoul.4985]

How about scaling between groups like Lords have.

[Doug.4930]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > But he's right. Because most people who play this game play it casually. And downstate is another tool in the more casual players arsenal that prevents them from being obliterated by players with superior skill and experience.

>

> You just explained why he is wrong.

>

> That is one aspect of downed state, yes - it provides a balance check in combat that assist those less skilled to overcome and defeat those more skilled, instead of having no hope. A kind of force equalizer which allows flex in numbers. Because WvW is casual for an **overwhelming majority**. For others - those more skilled - it adds another tactical layer to combat instead of just making it pewpew braindead like your average fps shooter.

 

Just because the game is casual doesn't mean we should limit the skill ceiling. Perfect example would be a game like super smash brothers. Super smash is casual in such a way that 4 friends can buy the game and play together without needing hours upon hours learning game mechanics before they can have fun. The controls are simple and after 5 mins you can pretty much have enough of a grasp to enjoy yourself.

Alternatively, If 4 fairly experienced players were to fight one tourney champ 4v1 they would get demolished. This is excellent game balance and what gw2 should strive towards. Super smash is a game for everyone. Casual players can enjoy the simple game mechanics, whilst the more focused players have a huge amount of potential to excel.

 

> Yes, it makes combat *harder* for the side with less numbers, unless they got the skill to weigh it up.

 

But wait, its already harder for the side that's fighting with less numbers. They already need to skill up to overcome a numerical disadvantage. Please explain the logic behind making it even more hard?

 

> But for some reason, people dont want hard fights - **they just want to win**. And some people claim these are the guys with "skill", **hah**.

 

You know whats funny this last sentence is simply perfect for my argument. Your statement can't possible apply to no downstate players. Because we already have hard fights because like I keep saying, we're already fighting outnumbered. Its already hard downstate or not. What we want is the larger group to not have more of an advantage. They have the numbers on their side and that should be it.

 

But this is fruitless we fundamentally disagree on one thing.

To go back to super smash brothers I believe that my 3 friends and I having zero chance at beating a tourney player in a 4v1 is exactly the way it should be. We 4 casual players don't deserve any crutch or boon or advantage etc that gives us more of a chance against a vastly more experienced player. If our numbers advantage isn't enough to overcome the skill gap then we should lose. **Every**. **Single**. **Time**. (which is what happened speaking as a noob smash bro's player with a friend who plays nothing but smash) He's put a colossal amount of time into the game where as we haven't and he deserves to slam dunk all 4 of us at once.

Where as you believe that the 4 less experienced players should have game mechanics on their side that give them more of a chance against the one pro player to make it more fair to the less experienced. To lower the skill ceiling as it were.

 

That's what this debate is about.

Should the chess novice be given 5 additional queens so that they can compete with the chess grand master?

You say Yes, I say No.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Doug.4930" said:

> That's what this debate is about.

> Should the chess novice be given 5 additional queens so that they can compete with the chess grand master?

> You say Yes, I say No.

Now *that* is a hilarious comparison, since chess allow for promoting pawns to queens - something more easily done the more pieces you have left and obviously something that can end up steamrolling the opponent. Kind of like rallying, yes?

 

But otherwise, this is why you have sPvP. If you say yes, thats what you want. Structured skill levels, no novices meeting "grand masters". Which is perfectly fine. GW2 have sPvP. But thats not WvW.

[Doug.4930]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > That's what this debate is about.

> > Should the chess novice be given 5 additional queens so that they can compete with the chess grand master?

> > You say Yes, I say No.

> Now *that* is a hilarious comparison, since chess allow for promoting pawns to queens - something more easily done the more pieces you have left and obviously something that can end up steamrolling the opponent. Kind of like rallying, yes?

 

Not quite, because unfortunately players don't earn downstate through clever play or strategy, quite the opposite in fact.

I'd say a rallying comparison would be more akin to a mechanic in which taken pieces return to the board.

 

> But otherwise, this is why you have sPvP. If you say yes, thats what you want. Structured skill levels, no novices meeting "grand masters". Which is perfectly fine. GW2 have sPvP. But thats not WvW.

 

sPvP can't be compared to WvW in anyway. Its a completely different game mode with completely different mechanics and objectives. You could tell me to go and play counter strike if I hate downstate so much and it would have similar relevance.

 

Just because WvW is harder to balance doesn't mean that we shouldn't try. For instance I know we agree that pocket healer minstrels are broken, would it not also be accurate for me to play devils advocate and say players who are fighting pocket healer comps should just "skill up"?

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Doug.4930" said:

> > @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > > That's what this debate is about.

> > > Should the chess novice be given 5 additional queens so that they can compete with the chess grand master?

> > > You say Yes, I say No.

> > Now *that* is a hilarious comparison, since chess allow for promoting pawns to queens - something more easily done the more pieces you have left and obviously something that can end up steamrolling the opponent. Kind of like rallying, yes?

>

> Not quite, because unfortunately players don't earn downstate through clever play or strategy, quite the opposite in fact.

> I'd say a rallying comparison would be more akin to a mechanic in which taken pieces return to the board.

You mean like getting a queen back when you already lost yours? Or even getting 8 more queens max if you didnt already loose all your ~~noobs~~ pawns in the balls deep push? Hmmmmmmmmmm....

 

You're starting to enligten me to the fact WvW is more like chess than I imagined.

 

> @"Doug.4930" said:

> Just because WvW is harder to balance doesn't mean that we shouldn't try. For instance I know we agree that pocket healer minstrels are broken, would it not also be >accurate for me to play devils advocate and say players who are fighting pocket healer comps should just "skill up"?

Very accurate. We have to deal with the pocket healers on a daily basis.

 

So, should we try to balance minstrels?

Should we try to balance firebrands?

 

**NAH LETS JUST DELETE IT FROM THE GAME**.

 

... Right?

[Doug.4930]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > > @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > > > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > > > That's what this debate is about.

> > > > Should the chess novice be given 5 additional queens so that they can compete with the chess grand master?

> > > > You say Yes, I say No.

> > > Now *that* is a hilarious comparison, since chess allow for promoting pawns to queens - something more easily done the more pieces you have left and obviously something that can end up steamrolling the opponent. Kind of like rallying, yes?

> >

> > Not quite, because unfortunately players don't earn downstate through clever play or strategy, quite the opposite in fact.

> > I'd say a rallying comparison would be more akin to a mechanic in which taken pieces return to the board.

> You mean like getting a queen back when you already lost yours? Or even getting 8 more queens max if you didnt already loose all your ~~noobs~~ pawns in the balls deep push? Hmmmmmmmmmm....

 

> You're starting to enligten me to the fact WvW is more like chess than I imagined.

 

Nice strawman. Its almost like my original analogy was a simple example in which to demonstrate my opinion that new players shouldn't be given extra tools to defeat experienced players. Whilst simultaneously demonstrating your opinion to the contrary, and was not intended to be taken literally and meticulously analysed. But grasp at whatever straws you can reach I guess.

 

> > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > Just because WvW is harder to balance doesn't mean that we shouldn't try. For instance I know we agree that pocket healer minstrels are broken, would it not also be >accurate for me to play devils advocate and say players who are fighting pocket healer comps should just "skill up"?

> Very accurate. We have to deal with the pocket healers on a daily basis.

>

> So, should we try to balance minstrels?

> Should we try to balance firebrands?

>

> **NAH LETS JUST DELETE IT FROM THE GAME**.

>

> ... Right?

 

Actually truthfully, If I could delete the minstrel stat from the game I 100% would.

 

EDIT: But then again If I could delete HoT and PoF expansions from WvW I'd do that too, so maybe I'm just nuts.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Doug.4930" said:

> Actually truthfully, If I could delete the minstrel stat from the game I 100% would.

>

> EDIT: But then again If I could delete HoT and PoF expansions from WvW I'd do that too, so maybe I'm just nuts.

Well, it *is* a small minority that shouldnt be listened to, that's the point.

 

[BeepBoopBop.5403]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > Actually truthfully, If I could delete the minstrel stat from the game I 100% would.

> >

> > EDIT: But then again If I could delete HoT and PoF expansions from WvW I'd do that too, so maybe I'm just nuts.

> Well, it *is* a small minority that shouldnt be listened to, that's the point.

>

 

If you think minstrel was a good addition to the game, well I already don't take anything you say seriously so I guess nothing changes from that point of view.

 

Edit: also LMAO at comparing downed state to pawn promotion. Pawn promotion takes skill and planning, downed state takes....letting your HP get to 0 while everyone around you presses F? Good analogy the greatest. It's like making pawn promotion the result of a check lmfao.

[Shroud.2307]

Anyone who is asking for it to be permanently removed, I just want to ask if when you lose a fight where you're outnumbering someone, do you respect that player for their victory? In my experience, the losers usually get mad about it instead.

 

So just keep in mind that if it were to be permanently removed it would also mean you'd run the risk of looking like a fool during the times you're doing the outnumbering because you won't be able to be saved by your friends. Something I know for certain some of the players in this thread often do.

 

No more falling back to a safe distance to go down to that Condition you couldn't clear so your buddy can pick you up. No more tactical downs when one of your targets is just about to die so you can rally. No more getting +1'd for help after you get blasted from 1500 range by a keyboard turning Soulbeast. No more Stealthing yourself or your friends when they're low health so you can rally under cover. A lot of things some of these people would hate to lose.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"BeepBoopBop.5403" said:

> > @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > > Actually truthfully, If I could delete the minstrel stat from the game I 100% would.

> > >

> > > EDIT: But then again If I could delete HoT and PoF expansions from WvW I'd do that too, so maybe I'm just nuts.

> > Well, it *is* a small minority that shouldnt be listened to, that's the point.

> >

>

> If you think minstrel was a good addition to the game, well I already don't take anything you say seriously so I guess nothing changes from that point of view.

>

> Edit: also LMAO at comparing downed state to pawn promotion. Pawn promotion takes skill and planning, downed state takes....letting your HP get to 0 while everyone around you presses F? Good analogy the greatest. It's like making pawn promotion the result of a check lmfao.

But what does it matter if I think it was a bad addition to the game? What am I supposed to do, go on long rants on the forum to outright delete it even when the majority wants to keep it and pretend my opinion is the only correct opinion?

 

Also I compared pawn promotion to *rallying*, not downed state. Because it gives side that end up outnumbering a distinct advantage - one that shouldnt even be in chess but for some reason is still there and novices and pros manage just fine to still play chess. But I suppose people that just want everything deleted wont even see the subtle differences.

[Antioche.7034]

> @"ASP.8093" said:

> > @"Tayga.3192" said:

> > Oh no downstate? Let me get my oneshot permastealth deadeye, go in, kill 1 person and run away.

> > No downstate? Let me get my 1800-1900 range longbow ranger.

> > No downstate? Let me get my oneshot mantra mesmer.

> >

> > Such skilled builds.

>

> In fairness, full-Minstrels Firebrands who pop 5-4-3 on top of a down and then rub them aren't really "skilled builds" either.

>

> Neither are the condi bunkers or other attrition-monkeys.

>

> Nor the Dragonhunters who spam out all their traps in order to create a single down out of position and then finish them with residual damage.

>

> It's quite possible there are no "skilled builds" in this game at all, with or without the down state.

 

Yes, you're right, however this 5-4-3 tome FB isn't oneshotting anyone with it. He isn't spending his whole time trolling people with a cheesy build. Imagine how tiring it would be to deal with these builds all the time.